If the Raps could re-draft since 2004

The Indiana post made me think of players we could of potentially drafted. I thought it would be fun to see what 'could of been'. I know that if we had drafted certain players in earlier years we wouldn't have been in the position to draft other players in latter years.
Also some of our picks were based on position/need rather than talent. So, this is a completely fruitless exercise but meh.

I decided to start with 2004 because the Araujo pick still haunts me at night.

2011 #5 pick Jonas Valančiūnas (C) -- Jonas Valančiūnas (C)
* I'm at the front of the JV badwagon but there are definite stand out that proved their worth this past year Klay Thompson, Kawhi Leonard, Kenneth Faried, and Bismack showed flashes of what he is capable of

The problem is if the Raptors draft AI in 2004 then a domino affect happens whereby they probably are not in the same spot in future years.

A lineup of Lawson, Iguodala, Granger, Aldridge, and Bynum (which never would have happened) is not going to be picking Valanciunas last year at #5.

This is a fun exercise but you can do this with any team in the league. The overwhelming majority of times the draft is a roll of the dice with many factors outside of player talent is going to effect performance (coach, environment, teammates, role, opportunities, playing time, off court influences, etc.).

Matt said what I was thinking as soon as I read the title of the thread. It would be virtually impossible for the Raptors to hit gold each year from 2005-present and always draft in the same position as if they did not hit gold.

The problem is if the Raptors draft AI in 2004 then a domino affect happens whereby they probably are not in the same spot in future years.

A lineup of Lawson, Iguodala, Granger, Aldridge, and Bynum (which never would have happened) is not going to be picking Valanciunas last year at #5.

This is a fun exercise but you can do this with any team in the league. The overwhelming majority of times the draft is a roll of the dice with many factors outside of player talent is going to effect performance (coach, environment, teammates, role, opportunities, playing time, off court influences, etc.).

I actually don't think it's fruitless. I personally was sitting there on draft night hoping for Iguodala, hoping for Granger, hoping for Aldridge so this is not necessarily 20/20 hindsight but an indictment of some pretty incompetent drafts (mostly Babcock - who set the franchise back a decade)

But maybe if they all play on the same team, they wouldnt be able to hog the spotlight and would have to share the ball equally which would result in more wins but less gaudy numbers. A crafty GM might be able to keep them in the 10 million range just by saying your 18 points a game are good, not great...

I'm not sure I entirely believe that. I mean don't you figure there is somebody in the organization or close that at least occasionally monitors fan forums, if not, twitter or facebook and that info is ocassionally brought up in meetings.

Even if there isn't, nothing about the future or even the immediate future is set in stone. You could even make an argument about certain things in the near past.

When you are going back years or even a year talking about irrelevant things that happened and was already looked over and done with and forgot about years ago.

I'm not sure I entirely believe that. I mean don't you figure there is somebody in the organization or close that at least occasionally monitors fan forums, if not, twitter or facebook and that info is ocassionally brought up in meetings.

Even if there isn't, nothing about the future or even the immediate future is set in stone. You could even make an argument about certain things in the near past.

When you are going back years or even a year talking about irrelevant things that happened and was already looked over and done with and forgot about years ago.

What the fuck is the point?

If you don't think there is a point, just ignore the thread. Btw, I think you are a very brave man, daring to say 'fuck' over and over again (that is, if you're not telling us you have a boner).

LBF, I didn't mean for you to take it personally (or as a cheap shot at the Raptors management).

I honestly did it for fun. I don't anguish over what could of been/ what hasn't happened but just wanted to kill some time during a slow day at work. I was going through the old drafts in the late 90s to see how players turned out.

The 2004 and 2005 drafts had a real possibility of being different and those were pre-Colangelo years anyway. I was praying for Aldridge but there was the Bosh-factor so even though Bargs was a huge gamble I felt excited prior to the season watching highlight vids of AB.

Apollo and Matt reiterated my point that in the later years the draft spot would be completely different had we made a home run selection. Especially the second round picks the odds are insane that we would pick those studs

The problem is if the Raptors draft AI in 2004 then a domino affect happens whereby they probably are not in the same spot in future years.

A lineup of Lawson, Iguodala, Granger, Aldridge, and Bynum (which never would have happened) is not going to be picking Valanciunas last year at #5.

This is a fun exercise but you can do this with any team in the league. The overwhelming majority of times the draft is a roll of the dice with many factors outside of player talent is going to effect performance (coach, environment, teammates, role, opportunities, playing time, off court influences, etc.).

I completely agree - just figured it would be a fluff debate about who we could of picked and who are the better players of people we didnt select Demar vs Jennings vs Holiday vs Lawson... I know, I know, definitely not very constructive for my first post haha

Not to turn it into a negative post but you could also look at it as we haven't struck gold selection in the past 8 years. I think Bargnani was silver, Demar was maybe bronze and Araujo was a rusty pop can.